At 05:22 09/10/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Eric said Bob Shell doesn't really like every camera that comes along, but
>rather wouldn't do a review of a bad product to avoid hurting it. Still,
>Bob seems to me to be fairly undiscriminating--he LOVES Russian stuff, and
>even at its best those Kievs are surely (relative to what else is available
>in medium format) bad products. BTW, while we're commenting on reviews,
>Popular Photography's Keppler certainly uses his column to boost whatever's
>new out there--if the newest miscellaneous zoom has a max aperture of f 9.7,
>that's OK, he'll say, available light photography is out of fashion anyway!
>Charles E. Love, Jr.
>517 Warren Place
>Ithaca, New York
>14850
>607-272-7338
>CEL14@CORNELL.EDU
>
1. In the audio industry, there are publications which cater to the
esoteric market. This means for them those that are more interested in
'sound' quality than numbers. The reviewers have NO trouble panning a piece
of equipment since the pub does not accept advertising. These pubs started
with Stereophile Magazine and now there are about a half dozen.
The equipment reviewed depends upon the philosphy of the publisher. Some
review only the high end market while others reach down to low end higher
quality equipment.
The pubs cost about $7 (US) per issue and are either monthly or bi-monthy.
The reviewers for the most part are well known in the industry and well
respected. To be a reviewer, there can be no association with any component
company, even as a consultant. This does not preclude an association with a
retailer (or so it seems). Several are professional musicians, acoustic
engineers and the like.
I wonder - could this concept be used in the photo industry?
2. Several comments regarding the CL was related to the fact that it
was related to Minolta. For those who 'looked down' on it for this reason,
what is your opinion of the R series, since they were derived from Minolta
bodies?
Brian Levy, J.D.
Toronto, Ont.
dlevy@worldy.com